The Nationalism Role During the French Revolution Essay

Introduction

The modern concept of nationalism does not consider its long history and the difference in cultural and political contexts. One of the most developed variants of this concept is the nationalism of the era of the French Revolution. Nationalism then gave meaning to a substantial political movement against the monarchy and helped shape modern France culturally, ideologically, and politically. Nationalism as a cultural concept matured in French literature and philosophy, becoming related to religion in terms of meanings. In 1789, with the outbreak of the French Revolution, the idea of ​​nationalism spread throughout France, forming a new ideology and structure of society that adhered to the values ​​of freedom, equality, and fraternity. The rise of nationalism within France, as it played heavily during the French Revolution, is considered hereafter.

Pre-revolutionary France

By 1789, an absolute monarchy had developed in France during the life of Louis XVI. He, in turn, relied on an extensive bureaucracy, a vast apparatus of officials, and a regular army. France’s entire political and cultural life revolved around the family of the ruler and his associates. Louis XVI behaved wastefully, and boldly, and showed complete ignorance of ordinary citizens’ affairs and France’s economic problems. Against the backdrop of absolute monarchy in 1788, unemployment developed among the working class and peasants who worked in the silk weaving industry and were engaged in harvesting¹. The general mental state of the citizens was depressive since France of those years reflected only the royal family’s life. The impression was that ordinary people felt isolated and deprived of the opportunity to express themselves. It is how the pre-revolutionary crisis developed, which raised a wave of French nationalism. The economic background made a quiet life of people impossible since they could neither work, trade nor pay royal taxes.

Realizing this, Louis XVI makes the first concessions and begins to consult with the assembly of notables. The assembled group included aristocrats, whom the king usually only notified of his will but did not consult and did not entrust the solution to significant problems. Meanwhile, in 1789, a political crisis can be traced against the backdrop of an economic one, and Louis XVI convened the Estates General². The Estates General is a representative body of power, incredibly responsible to citizens for innovations, particularly economic ones. It is an elected body, which eventually caused an unexpected stir among the peasants and the bourgeoisie, who wanted to participate in the country’s political life and put forward their demands. The peasants opposed payments, significant taxes, and levies and declared discrimination from feudal lords and seigneurs in their direction. The bourgeoisie demanded the abolition of censorship and restrictions on trade and industry.

It should be noted that the bourgeoisie was the stronghold of the ideas of the Enlightenment, which played a critical role in forming a new French ideology based on nationalism. The opening of the Estates General in the spring of 1789 made it possible for the people to feel their influence on matters of state³. The people felt united because they made efforts to solve everyday problems. Nevertheless, Louis XVI treated the Estates General condescendingly and lightly, considering them only as an auxiliary situational body for solving economic issues. Inspired people, seeing each other’s discontent and realizing for the first time overcoming fragmentation, began to act.

Ideology

The French Enlightenment became the backbone for creating the ideology of nationalism. Then the concept of nationalism was inextricably linked with society itself, and some philosophers did not separate these two concepts. However, historical and political events have reformed the linguistic meaning of the word. The views of Jean-Jacques Rousseau became central to the formation of the ideology of the French Revolution. Thanks to his works and other authors, France’s concept of nation and nationalism was quickly intellectualized while becoming the property of the peasants, not the aristocracy, the bourgeoisie, and the upper class.

Having defined the nation, Jean-Jacques Rousseau took up the difficult task of educating and instilling new moral and intellectual values. The ideological awareness of the nation begins at a moment of crisis and dispute, where all people understand the possibilities of unification⁴. Nationalism was understood by Jean-Jacques Rousseau exclusively as cultural and political. A nation is a formed independent unit because it needs a state. And this state should personify the nation and be in close contact with it. In the monarchical rule, this was not possible since, under the absolute power of Louis XVI, the French were separated from France. Louis XVI became the face of France; in contrast, France as a state became the only manifestation of the power of Louis XVI and his family.

The nationalist revolution took place in France because the people became the sole referent for the actions carried out by the revolutionaries. This revolution was carried out for the people and at the hands of the people, who had ideological enemies that prevented them from gaining freedom. A nation could live only by politics, and politics was the only way to manifest national aspirations⁵. Nevertheless, according to the ideologists of the French Revolution, the final formation of the nation takes place only after the revolution’s victory, even though the revolutionary struggle is closely connected with nationalism.

The theoretical justification for the nationalism of the revolution lies in the term of the sovereign. In monarchical countries, the sovereign is the king and his family, and the closest associates may also partially have the sovereign status⁶. The king is the guarantor of sovereignty and its most striking manifestation. That is why a king’s assassination or natural death (especially in the Middle Ages) was perceived as a severe blow and a possible end to statehood in monarchical countries. As a result of the revolution, and even at the moment of the revolution, the nation becomes sovereign. It is the central meaning of French nationalism and revolutionary mood. It is in the hands of the nation that the main forces and potential of the state are concentrated. The sovereign nation decides its future; its members are intellectually and morally developed, consistent, intelligent, and robust.

Jean-Jacques Rousseau develops before the revolution the theory of the social contract and the term of the civil religion, which is the list of ideologies in which the nation sincerely believes. Such a religion may be unique for each nation member in detail, but its coordinates, as a whole, should be general⁷. Thus, the French nation has chosen as its ideologemes freedom, the ideals of equality and support for each other, that is, fraternity. This ideology consistently shaped the revolutionary and post-revolutionary French society and later became a household name for democratic ideologies. Initially, however, the Rousseauist concept was far from what people now understand by democracy: the state’s rule under the people’s will. The Rousseauian concept was based on a confrontation with the monarchy and did not imply, at that particular time, a well-coordinated system of elections and multi-stage voting. In the 1780s, there were strict voting qualifications, which allowed only men over 25 years old, and this system was supported by many people, not only supporters of Louis XVI and the monarchy in general.

Nation and Society

The separation of society and nation was controversial, but this issue was clarified by the end of the French Revolution. Jean-Jacques Rousseau and other thinkers have tended to see the nation as a profoundly political term⁸. Society cannot fight political enemies for the future and freedom. In a way, French people are the most rigid and not active, unlike the nation⁹. Thus, the French community has always existed and cohabited with Louis XVI and his extravagance. However, the French nation was able to rally and bring the king to trial and execution.

Society thus retains inequality and can be divided into estates and castes, like the Indian system. According to the convention of the Jacobin Club, the nation is based on people’s equality and the struggle for this equality¹⁰. It is the primary meaning of egalitarianism, including the radical one. Having defeated the enemy in a brutal, bloody battle, nations deserve equality on various principles, from origin to professional affiliation and education. The system of lords, who subordinated the peasants, was overcome through tough reforms against the backdrop of the revolution. This feudal-communal system with an unequal distribution of wealth, manual labor for low pay, and extortions became one of the foundations of the French crisis in the heyday of Louis XVI.

The theoreticians of the French Revolution and nationalism took in the education of the social masses, who were then the majority uneducated. Instead of social tension, in the 1780s, there was an atmosphere of general acceptance of each other for overthrowing the absolute monarchy¹¹. Feeling deceived by Louis XVI and the nobility, it seemed to people that they could only rely on each other, even if many of them did not understand anything about politics. Thus, representative bodies were organized that people could trust. In the late 1780s, a change in feudal legislation began with an improvement in the position of the peasants.

The most significant change was the judicial reform of the same years because, under the absolute monarchy, the court (both the main and the small district courts) became utterly subject to the personal will of Louis XVI. The courts ceased to fulfill their direct duties and lost their practical meaning; therefore, the Estates General decided to change this system entirely¹². Cruelty throughout all the years of the revolution only reinforced people’s confidence in each other and the correctness of the professed views. Thus, people who achieved civic consciousness against the backdrop of violent events turned French society into a politically engaged nation with their claims, desires, and plans for the future.

Conclusion

Nationalism during the French Revolution became a stronghold of social restructuring and civic consciousness. United against the enemy, the absolute monarchy, people, despite the lack of education, managed to believe in the ideals of the Enlightenment and take part in creating new authorities that they trusted. The developed nationalist ideology was based on the models of pedagogy, culture, and humanistic maturation and helped to solve the fundamental economic problems caused by the wasteful rule of Louis XVI.

Bibliography

Armstrong, John. Nations Before Nationalism. UNC Press Books, 2017.

Barron, Alexander et al. “Individuals, Institutions, and Innovation in the Debates of the French Revolution.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 115.18 (2018): 4607-4612.

Carlyle, Thomas. The French Revolution. Oxford University Press, 2019.

Connely, Owen. The French Revolution and Napoleonic Era. Harcourt. 2000.

Greenfeld, Liah. Nationalism: A Short History. Brookings Institution Press, 2019.

Rousseau, Jean-Jacques. The Social Contract. Independently published, 2020.

Footnotes

1. Carlyle, Thomas. The French Revolution. Oxford University Press, 2019. 77.
2. Greenfeld, Liah. Nationalism: A Short History. Brookings Institution Press, 2019, 54.
3. Connely, Owen. The French Revolution and Napoleonic Era. Harcourt. 2000. 81-82.
4. Rousseau, Jean-Jacques. The Social Contract. Independently published, 2020.
5. Rousseau, Jean-Jacques. The Social Contract. Independently published, 2020, 24-26.
6. Ibid.
7. Ibid.
8. Rousseau, Jean-Jacques. The Social Contract. Independently published, 2020, 49.
9. Armstrong, John. Nations Before Nationalism. UNC Press Books, 2017, 60-61.
10. Connely, Owen. The French Revolution and Napoleonic Era. Harcourt. 2000, 100.
11. Armstrong, John. Nations Before Nationalism. UNC Press Books, 2017. 111-112.
12. Barron, Alexander et al. “Individuals, Institutions, and Innovation in the Debates of the French Revolution.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 115.18 (2018): 4608.